|
Post by impulse on Dec 4, 2018 11:04:57 GMT -5
I agree to a point with two caveats; the country should take basic care of its people, and that human history has demonstrated without fail that you need enough regulation and bite to back it up to keep people honest or they will screw over anyone possible for their own personal gain. If not every individual, someone will rise to fill that power void if not managed. Making sure people are not dying of treatable diseases or starving to death due to poverty? Keeping roads paved? Police, fire, etc? Part of taking care of people. Bothering people about what they eat, drink, smoke, who they love, marry, etc? Get out of their houses and bedrooms. Are you arguing against the existence of the FDA, or are you speaking more about the New York-style limits on sizes of drinks or portions of french fries with Happy Meals? No, stuff like the FDA is covered by "you need enough regulation to keep people honest." Without basic enforceable requirements, some company would replace grain with sawdust if it would save them a few bucks. I meant more stuff like edibles, weed, i.e. the war on drugs. Legalize it, regulate it, tax the ever loving shit out of it, and offer treatment for those who struggle with it. The gobs of money currently spent on the war on drugs and incarcerating non-violent drug convictions would easily fund it with buckets left over. I think the portion-size limits in NYC are silly.
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Dec 4, 2018 11:35:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2018 11:39:25 GMT -5
Excellent question. Based on some of the posts I have read on here that seems to be the ideal goal... I don't think anyone here is seriously advocating for doing away with a reasonable conservative party/representation altogether, but the current elected Republican party is neither reasonable nor conservative. Excellent post IMO. You voiced exactly why we should keep the government out of our day to day affairs as much as possible. I agree to a point with two caveats; the country should take basic care of its people, and that human history has demonstrated without fail that you need enough regulation and bite to back it up to keep people honest or they will screw over anyone possible for their own personal gain. If not every individual, someone will rise to fill that power void if not managed. Making sure people are not dying of treatable diseases or starving to death due to poverty? Keeping roads paved? Police, fire, etc? Part of taking care of people. Bothering people about what they eat, drink, smoke, who they love, marry, etc? Get out of their houses and bedrooms. None of us are "angels". We all have flaws and try to do the best we can. None of us are angels, but when you put yourself out there to run for and then become the most powerful elected official of the most powerful nation in the history of Earth to date, you are held to a higher standard and voluntarily putting yourself under a microscope. You may not feel that way but I am betting there are several posters that would like it be only one party. And I have zero interest in discussing our current president.
I agree with your second point. The problem with government is once they get a "foothold" into our lives: it is a slippery slope into controlling more & more like the stupid NYC stuff.
I still disagree with your third point. You have to take the bad with the good. Some of our best presidents had some serious flaws. There wasn't social media to broadcast them. And the media gave the office some respect.
|
|
|
Post by The Captain on Dec 4, 2018 11:42:42 GMT -5
I guess we should give POTUS Donald J. Trump credit (and his two cookies) for telling the truth when he said we needed to watch out for massive voter fraud going on in this election...
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Dec 4, 2018 11:57:58 GMT -5
I guess we should give POTUS Donald J. Trump credit (and his two cookies) for telling the truth when he said we needed to watch out for massive voter fraud going on in this election... This isn't voter fraud. This is election fraud.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Dec 4, 2018 12:00:22 GMT -5
I still disagree with your third point. You have to take the bad with the good. Some of our best presidents had some serious flaws. There wasn't social media to broadcast them. And the media gave the office some respect. Normally, I would agree with you, except that Trump blatantly and repeatedly disrespected the previous POTUS and continues to openly humiliate other government servants he disagrees with today. You can't demand respect when you don't offer any respect.
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Dec 4, 2018 12:05:22 GMT -5
I still disagree with your third point. You have to take the bad with the good. Some of our best presidents had some serious flaws. There wasn't social media to broadcast them. And the media gave the office some respect. Normally, I would agree with you, except that Trump blatantly and repeatedly disrespected the previous POTUS and continues to openly humiliate other government servants he disagrees with today. You can't demand respect when you don't offer any respect. This. A million times.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2018 12:14:07 GMT -5
I still disagree with your third point. You have to take the bad with the good. Some of our best presidents had some serious flaws. There wasn't social media to broadcast them. And the media gave the office some respect. Normally, I would agree with you, except that Trump blatantly and repeatedly disrespected the previous POTUS and continues to openly humiliate other government servants he disagrees with today. You can't demand respect when you don't offer any respect. I understand. I am NOT talking about him. As I said I have ZERO interest in discussing our current president. This comment was more directed about comments made after GHW Bush died.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Dec 4, 2018 12:21:56 GMT -5
Normally, I would agree with you, except that Trump blatantly and repeatedly disrespected the previous POTUS and continues to openly humiliate other government servants he disagrees with today. You can't demand respect when you don't offer any respect. I understand. I am NOT talking about him. As I said I have ZERO interest in discussing our current president. This comment was more directed about comments made after GHW Bush died. I didn't see anyone disrespecting him. I saw a comment suggesting the amount of praise being heaped upon him might be unwarranted. If all political discourse could be that disrespectful, the world would be in much better shape.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2018 12:26:24 GMT -5
I understand. I am NOT talking about him. As I said I have ZERO interest in discussing our current president. This comment was more directed about comments made after GHW Bush died. I didn't see anyone disrespecting him. I saw a comment suggesting the amount of praise being heaped upon him might be unwarranted. If all political discourse could be that disrespectful, the world would be in much better shape. Difference of opinion. I don't feel my response was harsh.
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Dec 4, 2018 12:45:46 GMT -5
My understanding is that from the point of view of the LGBTQ+ communities, policies of Reagan and later Bush led to horrific suffering and death in mass numbers by allowing the AIDS epidemic to run rampant. I was too young to really know about that at the time, so this is what I have observed others saying since he passed. I suspect that may be part of the complains being made elsewhere.
And I say that Trump has long-since abandoned any remote pretense of deserving the respect of the office due to his open contempt for it and our government.
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Dec 4, 2018 14:53:56 GMT -5
I swear, it's like right out of the Fox News Pundit Playbook. Ignore, attack, deflect. Obama hasn't been POTUS for two years. Old news. Still nothing on why you support Trump. Just attacks/insults on various prominent Democrats and posters here.
|
|
|
Post by beccabear67 on Dec 4, 2018 15:03:40 GMT -5
There was a time I thought the Democratic Party most in need of bowing out to a new party. I first got interested in U.S. politics when Jimmy Carter was elected and followed a decline for the U.S. and his speeches excoriating people to stop using gas and oil. He was a nice man I'm sure but boy, did he seem unprepared to work with the system in Washington. And then when Mondale was running he just seemed to be throwing all kinds of grand visions out there hoping to catch one special interest group or another. It did change with the Clintons but that's another story (and did I dislike Tipper Gore at the time).
Now the Republican Party needs to be reborn as an actual conservative party that is non-revolutionary and more centrist. I see them as in the pocket of special interests far more than the usual liberal pandering to this minority or that agenda by a factor of ten, or else bought and paid for. I know about Newt Gingrich and how he would keep getting reelected because he brought so much pork barrel to Cobb County Georgia, and he, Karl Rove and the perpetually angry Tea Party are no basis for a conservative party. A third party might find an opening somewhere outside all that recent reactionary, negative, repeating of short slogans junk. A new bigger tent without the baggage. Like Reagan's ignorance about AIDS, probably based on some evangelical simple-minded junk inserted with the religion (they seem to forget about if one loaf of bread is asked to give two in 'His' name).
All the divisions are the opposite of United and you have to start to figure out who and what is exacerbating and exploiting them, and it was not Barrack & Michelle Obama for 'being' black (or gay people 'being' gay). People have kept a lot of the Confederate stuff going for a real reason, to irritate and even intimidate. That's why they were putting up so many of those statues honoring the Civil War during the civil rights movement in the '50s-'70s. The confederate flag waving over state buildings was not so far removed from seeing a swastika brandished publicly, and I remember there were some 'parades' of that in the '70s that made me sick (had a Great Uncle beaten to death in occupied Holland for organizing a transit stoppage to protest Jewish men being marched off in the night), and also it makes you angry which is why they are doing it, they want the reaction, the them for their us to react to.
I don't know what we're going to do if the U.S. falls apart, starts feeling laws and rules don't apply for some 'great' vision. I always want representatives that will do a job, not be personalities with balloons and banners (and hats)!
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Dec 4, 2018 15:14:21 GMT -5
I swear, it's like right out of the Fox News Pundit Playbook. Ignore, attack, deflect. Obama hasn't been POTUS for two years. Old news. Still nothing on why you support Trump. Just attacks/insults on various prominent Democrats and posters here. Awwww, I think it's sweet that Mr. Hofmeister has found a hobby after retiring from SHELL.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Dec 4, 2018 15:17:18 GMT -5
Just starting to hear about this.
Apparently, during the 2008 campaign, Obama and his people -- Valerie Jarrett, Holder, maybe others, possibly even Michelle -- were in high-level talks with Iran to build some kind of school of international peace and diplomacy.
Supposedly it was William Ayers who reached out to Iran through back-channels who got it going. The word around the campaign was that they needed a fallback in case they didn't win. The Ayatollah was actually going to be given part of the campus for a theological school of his own, like a madras.
Now, the deal fell through, but it's starting to leak out that after Obama won, Iran threatened to reveal those talks and that abortive deal, which explains why Obama was forced to be so easy on the nuclear treaty with Iran and pretty much tiptoed around them throughout his presidency. (Remember the secret $400 billion transfer from Switzerland and that US patrol boat Iran captured?)
|
|